RECORD VERSION
STATEMENT BY
LIEUTENANT GENERAL H STEVEN BLUM
CHIEF, NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU
BEFORE THE
HOUSE ARMED SERVICES SUBCOMMITTEE ON TERRORISM,
UNCONVENTIONAL THREATS AND CAPABILITIES
SECOND SESSION, 109TH CONGRESS
ON
APPLYING LESSONS LEARNED FROM HURRICANNE KATRINA:
HOW DoD IS PREPARING FOR THE UPCOMING HURRICANE
SEASON
MAY 25, 2006
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNTIL RELEASED BY THE
HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
I’d like to thank-you for the opportunity to speak to you today regarding the National
Guard’s preparedness for the upcoming hurricane season. As always, the men and
women of your National Guard stand ready to provide assistance to civilian authorities—
in the form of personnel and equipment—at the request of the Governors or the
President, through a rapid, integrated response across the nation. Even as I stand
before you today, your National Guard has over 54,000 troops serving bravely in the
overseas warfight in Iraq and Afghanistan. Additionally, in a historic announcement
made just days ago by the President, the National Guard—some 6,000 troops—will be
called to support our border with Mexico for up to two years. This call-up of forces
doesn’t take into consideration the thousands of Army and Air National Guard forces that
are currently serving on the nation’s borders supporting the counterterrorism and
counterdrug mission. This recent announcement is confirmation that the National
Guard’s geographical distribution, community integration, and other traditional strengths
make it an effective and cost efficient force for many Homeland Defense (HLD) and civil
support requirements at both the State and Federal levels.
I share this with you so you might find comfort in knowing that, through real-world
training, your National Guard is constantly preparing for the next mission whether the
next enemy comes in the form of a terrorist or takes shape as a natural disaster. I’m
positive no one wants to see the likes of Hurricane Katrina again; however, we are
realistic and no preparedness is the best course of action. So, we continue to train for
like, or even larger, disasters in order to stay ready, reliable and relevant.
The National Guard is a full spectrum force which balances expeditionary warfight
support with Homeland Defense. Training and preparation for the overseas warfighting
mission provides National Guard forces with the vast majority of the preparation required
for Homeland Defense. It should be noted that the Homeland Defense requirements do
not focus solely on material solutions; they also identify needed cultural changes—
specifically regarding coordination and unity of effort across multiple agencies and
intergovernmental seams. We’re seeing great strides in this area. The emphasis of our
Homeland Defense mission is on prevention, pre-event deterrence, and responding
within the first 96 hours after a major incident.
In preparing for these missions, the National Guard continually examines the emerging
threats facing our nation as well as lessons learned from past performance—an in this
particular case for which you’ve invited me here today, the lessons learned from
Hurricane Katrina and Rita. So, with that said, the National Guard leadership has
identified the capability gaps that as a military force must be overcome in order to be our
most effective. While we have overcome many of them, we are constantly working to fill
all gaps in order to see continued success in future missions. Failure is not an option,
especially when American lives hang in the balance.
I want to be very specific about what your National Guard has done to prepare for the
next Katrina; however, in order for you to understand where we are going I think it
equally important that you understand where we’ve been. With that said, I’d like to
address the core capabilities inherent within the National Guard that we continue to
refine through various initiatives to address the identified gaps I’ve briefly touched on.
My hope is that this will give you a baseline of what the National Guard brings to the
fight.
Governors count on the National Guard to be the first military responder and call on
Guard assets at their disposal within the first hours of an event; therefore resourcing is
critical. The National Guard must be able to support the Governors’ requirements on an
immediate basis, and respond with the right capabilities, to the right location, at the right
time. The States have indicated to the National Guard Bureau that there are certain
capabilities they feel they need to meet emergencies. As a result, we have identified the
following ten essential capabilities each State, Territory and District of Columbia must
maintain at all times: (1) Joint Force Headquarters (2) Engineering (3) Civil Support
Teams (4) Security (5) Medical (6) Transportation (7) Maintenance (8) Logistics (9)
Aviation and, (10) Communications. In many cases, we leverage the EMAC—
Emergency Management Agreement Compact—system to ensure these ten essentials
are available to every state and territory. EMAC has proven successful in, and I’ll
discuss this agreement in more detail.
We are seeking to further leverage the capacity currently existing in these 10 essential
capabilities to address identified gaps through the development of the following
initiatives and concepts.
(1) Joint Force Headquarters—State (JFHQ-State). JFHQ-State is a joint
command and control entity in each State and territory. It is integrated into
national consequence management and contingency planning structures. JFHQs
provide situational updates (common operating picture) information to national
level headquarters before and during any contingency operation and Joint
Reception, Staging, and Onward Movements, and Integration (JRSOI) for all
inbound military forces. In very simplistic terms, JRSOI is simply a selection of
predetermined sites (distribution points, airports etc) and routes for moving
supplies and personnel into affected areas. Federal law provides a mechanism
whereby a National Guard officer can command federal troops. Such a
commander at the head of a Joint Task Force—State (JTF-State), which is
created in times of emergency by the Joint Force Headquarters, can assume
tactical control of all military units –State National Guard, other National Guard
forces, Active Component and Reserves. The JTF-State commander can be a
dual-hatted commander of both Title 32 (Federally funded, yet state controlled)
and Title 10 (Federally funded and controlled) forces as demonstrated in the
2004 G8 Summit as well as the Democratic and Republican National
Conventions.
(2) Joint Force Headquarters Joint Operations Centers (JFHQ JOC). The JOC is
a network composed of the National Guard Bureau JOC, located in Arlington,
Virginia and a separate JOC in each of the 54 States and Territories. The JFHQ
JOC serves as the primary entity for coordinating, facilitating, and synchronizing
efforts in support of their states, information requirements of the National Guard
Bureau and customers at the Federal level during natural disasters, National
Special Security Events (NSSE), exercises and domestic activities. Each JFHQ
JOC has redundant connectivity: DoD architecture of NIPR and SPIR; a High
Frequency (HF) network with classified and unclassified voice and data
information; and commercial systems. In a nutshell, the JOC concept allows for a
continual and accurate flow of information from each state and territory into the
National Guard Bureau. In turn, this information is consolidated and shared with
Northern Command and other federal agencies.
(3) National Guard Chemical, Biological, Radiological/Nuclear, and high-yield
Explosive (CBRNE) Enhanced Response Force Package (CERFP). The
National Guard developed and fielded 12 CERFP teams to provide a regional
capability to respond to incidents involving chemical, biological, radiological or
high explosive threats. Each team is designed to rapidly (less than 96 hours)
provide the capability to locate and extract victims from a CBRNE incident site
and perform mass patient/casualty decontamination and medical triage and
stabilization. The CERFP augments the capabilities of the National Guard’s Civil
Support Teams (CST). The incremental training and equipment for this capability
is specialized, compatible with the first responders, and interoperable with the
incident command system. Congress provided direction and, for FY’06, funding
to establish an additional 5 teams bringing the total to 17.
(4) Critical Infrastructure Program- Mission Assurance Assessments (CIPMAA). National Guard CIP-MAA teams execute the pre-planning needed to
educate the civilian agencies on basic force protection and emergency response.
Additionally, these teams are building relationships with first responders, owners
of critical infrastructure and National Guard planners in the States and Territories.
CIP-MAA teams deploy traditional National Guard forces in a timely fashion to
assist in protection of the Nation’s critical infrastructure, including vital elements
of the Defense Industrial Base. Currently, six “pilot” teams staffed by 14 specially
trained National Guard personnel conduct vulnerability assessments.
(5) National Guard Reaction Force (NGRF). Being based in so many
communities, the National Guard has proven time and again that it can muster
forces and be on the scene of an incident within hours. Each of the 54 States
and Territories is currently training a battalion size reaction force that can
respond anywhere in the state with an initial 75 to 125 person element within a
minimum of four to eight hours. So, generally, we can get a company of troops
on the ground within hours and a battalion in place overnight. These reaction
forces provided crucial support to law enforcement in the response to Hurricane
Katrina. The NGRF is task-organized from existing units and can provide Critical
Infrastructure Protection (CIP), site security, and security and support during
CBRNE contingency operations.
(6) Joint CONUS Communications Support Environment (JCCSE). The National
Guard has successfully established a JCCSE nationwide. This communication
environment is a joint National Guard Bureau and Northern Command strategy
for leveraging current National Guard communication capabilities to provide
support to the major military commands, Department of Defense as well as nonDoD partners at State/Territory-level and to any incident site. Each JFHQ
established Homeland Security Information Network (HSIN) linkages. The HSIN
is an unsecured collection of Department of Homeland Security systems
designed to facilitate information sharing and collaboration. Additionally, each
Joint Force Joint Operation Center (JF JOC) has secure/non-secure real-time
operational network linkages in addition to secure video teleconference
capabilities. This is critical to providing real time operational connectivity as well
as a common operating picture to local, state and federal agencies.
(7) Weapons of Mass Destruction-Civil Support Teams (WMD-CSTs). Include 22
Army and Air National Guard- Active Guard Reserve (AGR) personnel organized,
trained and equipped to enter contaminated areas and identify contaminants
within a short period of time. They have extensive reach-back communications
capability to facilitate off-site evaluation and support from various laboratories.
They are equipped with mobile laboratories capable of providing identification of
chemical or biological materials. To date, the National Guard has fielded 36
CSTs and will have 55 teams by FY07.
(8) Aviation Security and Support (S&S) Battalions. As part of the Army’s overall
aviation transformation, the Army National Guard has been able to convert and
grow some valuable dual-purpose aviation structure that will be readily available
and responsive to Homeland Security/Defense needs, in addition to their normal
Army operational mission. The ARNG officially activated six of these 24-aircraft
S&S Battalions on 1 October 2005 and placed them in readily responsive
locations across 44 states.
We are, once again, on point to test many of these preparedness measures—some
which were put in place since last year—as we are fast approaching another hurricane
season. In this post-Katrina era we find that the best preparation for the next potential
disaster is history. With that said, I want to stress for the record that I continue to be
particularly proud of the timeliness and magnitude of the National Guard’s efforts in
advance of Hurricane Katrina and our response in its immediate aftermath. National
Guard forces were in the water and on the streets of New Orleans rescuing people
within four hours of Katrina’s passing. Over 50,000 National Guard personnel hailing
from every state and territory responded to calls for support of the affected region. The
effort was tremendous, but we realize we can always improve. I always tell my
leadership and my troops that in order to have a great team we have to practice to the
point of failure to ensure our future success. Once you identify the broken parts, you can
then focus on a plan to strengthen the weak link. With that said, the real-world test on
the magnitude of Katrina, definitely helped us find the breaking points on which we’ve
focused much attention.
In our after-action reviews of our response to Katrina, we talked with our troops on the
ground in the hurricane affected areas as well as our commanders, and we participated
and learned from the Senate and House hearings to gain a good understanding of our
performance shortfalls. We’ve taken these “lessons learned” and incorporated them into
our training and exercise play to improve upon our emergency response effectiveness
over the past several months. I’d like to take a moment to walk you through a couple of
our most recent activities focused specifically on hurricane preparedness and
emergency response. I believe they serve as a very good warm-up to the beginning of
the hurricane season.
Our most recent preparedness measure was our participation in Ardent Sentry ’06. The
two-week U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) exercise was designed to test military
support to federal, provincial, state and local authorities while continuing to support the
Defense Department’s homeland security mission. This emergency response exercise
included more than 5,000 U.S. and Canadian service members working with authorities
in five state and two Canadian provinces to test response capabilities. The scenario
includes crises ranging from a major hurricane to a terrorist attack to a pandemic flu
outbreak. Again, the goal is to find the points of failure. Among the many objectives of
the exercise—improved communications, interagency coordination, and emergency
response training—I am particularly pleased with the working relationship that has
developed between the National Guard Bureau and Northern Command. It may seem
like a simple objective, but this relationship between the two is critical to future success
of any national response.
Several hurricane response workshops and conferences have been conducted
throughout the year with the most recent being in Hilton Head, South Carolina at the end
of April. Attendees included National Guard planners from Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi,
Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North and South Carolina, Virginia, Kentucky, Virgin Islands,
Northern Command and other federal agencies. I don’t have to tell you that there are
huge benefits to pulling these key regional players together in one place. Each
participant provided updates on their specific hurricane preparedness and assets that
are available to them. So, we’re all learning from one another and, I’ll stress that if this
opportunity allows just one state to improve on its’ existing hurricane plan by gaining an
idea from another state I’d consider that a success. Simple changes can save many
lives. When you net it all down, the sharing of information—whether it be too identify
deficiencies and shortcomings or helping others to understand capabilities available to
them in time of disaster—prior to an actual event is important to your survival during the
actual event.
While we’ve conducted several and have more to follow, I’ve only highlighted a couple of
the conferences and exercises specifically designed to improve our emergency
response to a hurricane. We conduct these exercises for obvious reasons; however, it’s
worth repeating that a great team must practice to the point of failure to ensure future
success.
Our review of Katrina helped to identified four major issues that needed to be addressed
before this hurricane season—resourcing, interoperability, command and control of all
military forces and training. I’d now like to address what we have done and what we are
doing to address each of these issues in order to ensure our preparedness.
RESOURCING
Even prior to 9/11, the National Guard did not have all of the equipment it is required to
have to be fully mission capable. The pace of combat has placed even further
challenges on us. In order to ensure that deploying units are fully equipped and ready to
support operations anywhere in the world, we have transferred over 101,000 items of
equipment in support of these missions. This situation has presented the National
Guard with challenges in keeping our inventories here at home fully supplied with critical
items such as trucks, radios, and heavy engineering equipment. With the help of
Congress and the President, we have made an excellent start in filling these equipment
gaps, and the President’s budget will allow the National Guard to continue on the road to
recovery. Over the FY06-FY-11 timeframe, the Administration plans to invest $19.2
billion and $4.4 billion in the Army and Air National Guard, respectively, demonstrating
an unwavering commitment to providing the resources necessary to protect our
homeland.
We are also addressing this through force structure rebalancing and as mentioned
earlier the use of the Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC) as an
essential force multiplier. This agreement among the States enhances a Governor’s
response capabilities by providing access to regional forces and equipment. Without
question, EMAC enabled the National Guard to overcome many of the
equipment/resource obstacles faced during Hurricane Katrina and Rita. The National
Guard Bureau Joint Operations Center (NGB JOC) served as the coordination point for
the various EMAC requests before sending the requests out to the states and territories.
We provided needed advice and assistance to Governors in identifying, selecting,
requesting and deploying Guard forces needed in the affected states. We were able to
test this process thoroughly during the recently conducted Ardent Sentry ’06 exercise
that I just discussed.
Maintaining essential capabilities across the National Guard, amid on-going overseas
operations, Active Component (AC)/Reserve Component (RC) rebalance, modularity
conversions, and national strategy adjustments is an evolving task. Nevertheless, the
National Guard Bureau attempts to synchronize all of these activities to ensure at least
50 percent of a given state’s National Guard is always available for state missions, and
HLD operations.
INTEROPERABILITY
The White House report, The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina Lessons Learned
spoke to the need for interoperability. It said, “lack of interoperable communications was
apparent at the tactical level, resulting from the fact that emergency responders,
National Guard, and active duty military use different equipment.” Our specialized C4
packages, though limited in number, were able to bridge the frequency gap between
military and civilian personnel in many locations. An in-depth look at interoperability is
on-going and there is a “sense of urgency” inside the Army and the Defense Department
about meeting the National Guard’s equipment needs.
On a positive note, Katrina supplemental funding was leveraged to enhance the National
Guard’s Joint CONUS Communications Support Environment (JCCSE), which I
discussed earlier is a joint National Guard Bureau and Northern Command strategy. As
a result, twenty three states—located primarily in the hurricane region—will have access
to the new Joint incident Site Communications Capability (JISCC) by hurricane season.
This communication system will provide a bridge for civilian and intergovernmental
agencies that exist at the state and local level, so they can interface in a synergistic and
coordinated fashion with the DoD assets that may be requested.
COMMAND AND CONTROL
The infusion of the active duty forces into the Hurricane Katrina response effort
presented some challenges at the operational level. There were some gaps in
communication, coordination and integration into ongoing National Guard and
Emergency Response operations already underway by the affected states. The
situation was occasionally exacerbated by incompatible communication systems, lack of
familiarity with the local area, and lack of involvement in the pre-Hurricane planning.
The efficacy of the creation of the Joint Forces Headquarters-State (JFHQ-State)—
which I discussed earlier—was proven in the National Guard portion of the response as
both of the hardest hit states, Mississippi and Louisiana were able to integrate forces
from 53 other states and territories and the District of Columbia. Furthermore, the Joint
Forces Headquarters-State could have provided reception, staging, and onward
integration for the federal forces deployed by NORTHCOM to support the civil authorities
in the affected states.
In addition to the benefits of JFHQ-State I’ve already discussed, a Joint Task ForceState (JTF-State) can, with state-federal concurrence, assume tactical control of all
military units ordered to respond to a contingency operation or disaster. This includes all
state National Guard, other National Guard forces, Active Component as well as
Reserves. The JTF-State commander can be a dual-hatted commander of both Title 32
and Title 10 forces giving unity of command within the military forces. The JTF-State can
act as a subordinate Command and Control headquarters for US NORTHCOM if
required. The effectiveness of dual-hatted command was proven in 2004 at the G8
Summit, Operation Winter Freeze as well as the Democratic and Republican National
Conventions. These were landmark achievements. For the first time in our nation’s
history, the military attained unity of command for all forces operating in support of a
major event. In each case, from one Joint Force Headquarters, a single National Guard
officer commanded Guard units from multiple states operating under Title 32 authority,
as well as Active Component Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps title 10 forces in a
joint, intergovernmental, interagency environment.
TRAINING
I’d like to transition into training and the National Guard’s determination to take
advantage of opportunities to share training and planning expertise with civilian partners,
and the importance that these efforts be institutionalized. One of the White House
reports that came out after Katrina recommended that each Federal agency have a
homeland security professional development program. We are pleased to say that we
are already heading in that direction. The National Guard’s Joint Interagency Training
Center in West Virginia, serves as a model that demonstrates how joint training capacity
can be expanded and how the military and civilian communities can train and work
together. We are working with the Joint Forces Command to institutionalize this Center
within the Departments process for joint education and training. This will allow us to
increase the overall effectiveness of the national effort through standardized operational
concepts, shared experiences, and enhanced interoperability.
These four areas of concern -- resourcing for personnel and equipment, interoperability,
command and control of all military forces, and training – will require continued attention
as each is crucial to ensuring an effective response for Homeland Defense and civil
support. Identifying and correcting these concerns will only improve the National Guard’s
already high state of readiness.
I’ll close by saying your National Guard is ready, reliable and relevant. Thank you for
your time, and I would be happy to answer any of your questions at his time.